Let me know when it can take a selfie of my face and instantly post it to my Facebook page.
…and sent press releases to AP an UPI
Another bit of technology looking for a market. and missing it, badly.
p.s. - the page would not load for me. I consider myself blessed.
The idea of using tech to monitor and regulate your dietary intake won’t work until they invent a way for the computer to make dietary decisions for you. The problem with the Vessyl concept is that even if it did work, it would only analyze your beverage after you’d poured it out and committed to drinking it.
What we need is not more information about what we’re ingesting — we already have plenty of information. What we need is a robot that automatically tells us what, when, and how much to consume.
There’s a million apps that help you plan a menu according to your dietary needs. There’s plenty of apps/websites that can help you decide what those needs might be. I am not sure I want my apps doing much more than that let alone agree that’s what we “need”.
I didn’t mean everyone. I guess I shouldn’t have said “we”. Some people have no trouble sticking to a healthy diet. But I and people like me would be a lot healthier if dietary decisions were taken out of my hands.
Do you have specific health needs? If not, then it simply isn’t that complicated that you need a robot making your decisions. Just rotate through a variety of meats, grains and vegetables. 1/3 each on your dinner plate
Dude, you don’t know me. OK?
How will it stop you? If you are so likely to eat and drink things that are not good for you despite dietary advice from all of the agencies that tell you about appropriate dietary habits, how will such a robot stop you?
Will it physically grab the fork out of your mouth. “Bad WF Tomba!” Or what? Will your salt shaker extend a tendril to your food, and close a stopper if there is already an adequate amount of salt in your food? Or what?
I don’t get it.
It won’t have to physically stop me. I’m not determined to eat bad food. I just habitually make poor choices. I’m sorry you don’t understand.
No, I do understand. I’ve got special foods that are not good for me that I still make and eat. What I don’t understand is how you expect a technological solution to avoid this.
I mean, the first thing I’d tell a robot kitchen is, “Make me a serving of nachos once every two weeks, and I’ll eat the rest of the chips as a snack with feta cheese and green olives until they’re finished up.” You appear to want a robot kitchen that will deny you anything that is not good for you. But how long will it be until you’re sneaking around behind your robot kitchen’s back? “It’s not you, I swear, it’s just that 7-11 is so appealing!”
I can make a very simple rule and stick to it religiously, because it takes away the need for me to think and make decisions. “Eat what the robot tells you to eat” is the kind of rule I can follow. It’s when I have to make my own choices that I screw up. Basically, I am bad at freedom.
I read this article which is a decent analysis of what the journalist thought was going on with the delays. Basically that yes, it was a spectrometer being used to analyse the contents which probably worked well in the large scale demo, but that it’s too hard to get a very small, cheap unit to maintain accuracy. And that they had obviously gone into fundraising assuming they’d be about to work around this issue, but hadn’t yet been able to.
So as someone still waiting (I ‘got’ one for my birthday in Sept '14), I believe it’s not a scam, just an idea that was too ambitious for the technology available.
This was pretty much my thought. Insurance companies will get hold of your dietary logs and use them to deny coverage. “We’re not going to pay for your heart meds anymore. You records say you’ve been eating 4 donuts every morning for years.”
Yeah, I don’t think it’s a complete scam, but I do think that they had absolutely no reason at the start to think they’d be able to solve all of their problems–whatever prototypes they had back then were not sufficient demonstrators. They should have known better, but seemingly didn’t. As an engineer, I still consider this to be a breach of ethics, but not quite at the same level as outright lying.
The problem with too many of these Kickstarter-type campaigns is that, even if they’re not actual scams, they are often rather dishonest about how advanced their design concept is, and how likely it is that they will be able to produce the item for which they are seeking funding.
This is particularly the case with technology products like this. Too often, when they ask for money, these people give the impression that they pretty much have a working product ready to go, but they just need to the money to get it produced. In the case of many of these projects, including this one, they would have been more honest saying something like, “We’ve got this great idea for a cup that will sense what beverage it contains and give you a nutritional breakdown, but we still have a lot of R&D to do in order to work out whether we can really make this work.”
Basically, they say “We can make this product, and we just need a bunch of money to do it,” when they should be saying, “We want you to give us a bunch of money so we can work out whether or not we can actually make this product.”
I think you’re right - it’s the problem with all Kickstarter type projects - they run campaigns aimed at convincing us to ‘invest’ in a project, giving the impression that it’s almost there, just needs funding to viably scale. When really they are asking for a donation for a great idea. Which is fine - and I reckon a fair few number of people would still invest - and potentially would limit the negative fallout when a project ultimately fails, like it looks like this one has.
I think Vessyl has failed most though because they’ve not been honest. We got less and less regular updates with a ‘all going well, you’ll hear more soon!’ message, and in the end what we really wanted was the truth. We’ve not asked for our money back yet, but definitely good faith has been damaged, which wouldn’t be the case if they’d explained what was causing the holdups.
The norm in business, if you’re asking people to invest in an idea that might not work at all, is to offer them a share of the profits.
I’m sorry, no. This is most certainly not something inherent in the kickstarter model. A buddy of mine did a successful kickstarter to publish his dad’s old journals that he had edited and put a bunch of found pictures to. I’ve seen plenty of reasonable, if not guaranteed successful ideas. “Kickstarter type projects” don’t mean “pie in the sky engineering projects” like this one.
We did. It’s your money, I guess.